Ask 411 Wrestling 10.14.09: RVD Walking, TNA Sinking and Burning Hammers Hitting!

Posted by Mathew Sforcina on 10.14.2009

Did Jim Ross travel in time? Did Piper kill a man? Why isn't Vince raiding TNA? Who were Doinks? And who was a member of DX for a cup of coffee? All these, plus I defend Goldberg's free TV title win, defend Thumbtacks' realness, and more!

This is Ask 411 Wrestling.

I know you know that already, but I have to fill this space up somehow, and that seemed a good an intro as any. Short, to the point, why mince words?

Oh yeah, the space I need to take up, that's why I have to mince words. Although I'm mincing enough in this week's Fact or Fiction AND in this week's Serious Roundtable.

And for the few of you who care, I am now YOUR AWF Australasian Heavyweight Championship #1 Contender. All I have to do is beat ‘Iron Jay' of the Fish commercials and I win the belt. Hooray for me!

And Hooray for banner!

Backtalking

Yeah, that has to be updated, get me some snazzy pics like Randle has.

Wrestlemania 13 Blade Job: You know, maybe I should stop answering Bret Hart related questions till I get his book. Apparently every single match he ever had is discussed in it.

For the record: Bret Hart bladed Austin but had to make it look like a hardway because they were told not to blade. Thusly, WWF wanted a no blood match but thankfully Austin and Hart had other ideas. So there you go, yet another Bret Hart blades without permission story.

The European Title a Vanity belt?: Yes, the European Title did have a proper start, with a tournament and everything, as opposed to the Legend's belt, which was just created out of thin air. However, the European title was originally designed to be a belt for British Bulldog to have to please himself, Bret Hart, and the European fan base. It wasn't until Shawn won it that it began to be a proper belt with defences and stuff. Well OK, it wasn't until HHH won it that it got defended, but you get my point.

So basically the European title began as a ‘real' belt that was really a vanity one then became a real title, while the Legends belt began as a ‘vanity' belt that was really a ‘proper' one. Clear?

Approving Comments: I am not now, nor have I ever been in charge or approving or non-approving of comments. Do you honestly think if I was running that section that the Paul Roma/RVD/Everyone else crap would get posted?

Buyrates: Robbie was kind enough to send me a nice detailed look at historical buyrates, and I'm not above deferring to superior knowledge on some subjects, so here we go:

I have some information to contribute in terms of PPV buy rates. This is a topic I've also had a lot of interest in over the years and thus have spent some time gathering articles from cable trade magazines in order to get a clearer picture of the situation for the 80s and 90s events.

The big problem with understanding PPV availability is that it did not arrive in every place at the same time, nor did it have the comparatively fast penetration that cable television had from the beginning. Large metropolitan areas were obviously earlier to adopt then smaller cities (although many people point my hometown of Portland, OR and our Trailblazers team as being one of the early pioneers of PPV television). So while providing a chart with the % of US households with access to cable television is helpful for judging cable TV ratings, it's quite leap away from the respective availably of pay-per-view.

There is another issue that is twofold. First off in the late 1980s and early 1990s, not all cable systems universally covered WWF and WCW events every single month. It's hard to imagine this nowadays! At the time though, when buy rates dipped too low cable systems would drop the next PPV from their potential offerings. WrestleMania VI is a good example of this phenomenon. The WWF had to fight for WrestleMania 6 to be carried by several major cable companies, due to lack of success of the Royal Rumble 1990 PPV (and to a lesser extent, the poor performance of the No Holds Barred – The Movie and the Match PPV). Those who watched Superstars of Wrestling and Wrestling Challenge in the months before the event may remember the WWF making pleas to write their cable companies about the issue.

Additionally, not all homes received PPV via the same method during this era. Some people received it via satellite, while others received it on cable via an addressable converter (i.e. you could order it via the telephone or through onscreen prompts and the channel would be automatically descrambled for you to view at home at the specified time and your order recorded in their computer system). Many folks (especially those in small and midsized cities) did not have either option available to them and could only receive PPV by physically going down to the cable company and renting a descrambler. This venue was necessary for lots of folks (myself included) – due to the high cost of installing addressable PPV systems. Smaller cable companies resisted the change for a long time due to uncertainty in the viability of the PPV model as a money-maker. These boxes were colloquially known as "traps" or cable boxes that were not able to communicate in a truly bidirectional manner, necessitating signal filters in the box itself to block out PPV (and premium channel) access unless the user rented and installed a descrambler that could be sent control codes by the cable company.

The problem with this is that since the traps system was not an automated system; and since smaller individual cable companies self-reported the number of buys for events to the their larger corporate offices; you had a huge potential for error. There was no automated and centralized system for reporting PPV buys in most cities – so every small and mid sized local cable company had to do it themselves. So you can see the huge potential for error using this method.

Further compounding the problem is that there have always been inconsistencies in the PPV numbers reported by the WWF and WCW (at least prior to the WWF being a public company). Throughout the 1990's, independent reports of buys often showed great disparity with the information provided by Titan Towers (or Turner Headquarters).

For example:

A Multichannel News Article from September 12, 1994 in referring to Summer Slam 1994 reports that "Buy-rates for the event were up as much as 10 percent over last year, said Titan Sports. The event generated nearly 400,000 buys, slightly above the 360,000 buys the event drew in 1993, said Skip Desjardin, manager of PPV marketing for Titan" The same article also mentions that Cable TV operators collectively pegged the buy rate between 1.0 and 1.5.

If you look up this show on websites around the internet you'll normally find 1.3 as the stated buyrate; sometimes you'll see 1.25; but let's just assume that this is due to rounding. Since it falls in line with the independent estimates given by cable operators, we can conclude that it is reasonably accurate. Once you start doing the math though, you'll start to see the inconsistencies.

Wikipedia is perhaps the most blatant example – as it is states that: (From the Summer Slam 1995 article) "The pay-per-view received a 0.9 buyrate, equivalent to approximately 360,000 buys… The buyrate was down on the 1994 SummerSlam event, which received a 1.3 buyrate, equivalent to 520,000 buys." So suddenly a 1.3 buy rate has jumped from 400,000 buys to 520,000 buys. One of these numbers is clearly wrong – one of them comes straight from the WWF's marketing department and the other is probably based on poor math, but in reality both of them are wrong.

Looking at the source listed for this particular Wikipedia entry, you will see that they are making a terrible mistake in their math – that is, assuming that a 1.0 buyrate equates to 400,000 buys for this event (and in fact, all PPV events across time.) This is completely false, as while PPV availability has stabilized in recent years, nowhere near 40 million people had access to PPV in 1994.

An article from the Museuem of Broadcast Communications reveals that the estimated number of homes capable of accessing PPV in 1994 was 22 million (this is in line with several other figures I have that peg it from 21 to 22 million). So if the WWF pulled a 1.3 buyrate for Summer Slam 1994 out of a 22 million home addressable universe, then that amounts to about 286,000 buys, not 400,000 and certainly not 520,000 buys. So as you can see, untangling this mess after the fact and coming up with truly definitive numbers for each PPV involves so much information that most of us do not have access to, that it is nearly impossible to get a clear picture. The WWF #s in this example are egregiously out of the reasonably expected range, so the validity of their buyrate information is in serious doubt. Independent numbers are available for earlier shows, but I imagine that the further you go back (and away from addressable PPV distribution systems) that the errors will compound quickly. Just getting reliable data on the potential size of the PPV universe prior to 1989 is very difficult. I'm afraid that it's mostly a fruitless quest.

Thanks again to Robbie for that.

Your Turn, Smart Guy…

So, last week's question was…

What am I? A professional wrestling title, I've been held by some greats and some not so greats in my time. Spanning over 25 years, my longest reign and my shortest reign were both the sole reign for those who held me.* 9 times I was vacated and a tournament was held to crown me, although I was vacated more than that (and one of those tournaments never happened). At least 4 title switches will almost certainly never be shown by WWE again. I've changed hands in Australia twice, Germany 3 times and a hell of a lot of times in North Carolina. At least one 411 running joke/meme has gotten his hands on me, as have such greats as Ricky Steamboat, Arn Anderson, Ric Flair, Sting, Bret Hart and David Flair. I was killed once and for all at a Survivor Series, I am What?

Here's the belt in question.

I'll admit this one is easy, but next week's is a cracker, trust me.

What am I? A video game, I was available on home consoles during the 90's, or at least on one home console. Featuring over 40 wrestlers, battle royals, a few game play types that would not been seen again in the games sequels, and that guy we don't talk about any more, it was a well received game for the time, even if it's sequels (both direct and then post-switch) tend to over shadow it. The only game in history to allow you to have the epic showdown of Glacier V Wrath, I am What?

Questions, Questions, Who's Got The Questions?

Mike asks for clarification over something from last week.

I was interested to read that you wrestled with guys using the "mist" effect. I was wondering, how do they manage to "spit" it in matches after being in the ring for 15 minutes or so? Muta, ect... did it after wrestling a match for awhile, so how do they do that? Obviously they aren't keeping it in their mouth for 15 minutes, so how does that work? I hope this question isn't too dumb to be answered. Thanks!

Well, they could, theoretically. If they are using the ever popular condom filled with mist method, it is possible to hold that in your mouth then chew and spit at the right moment. But for the most part, they have the mist in a small bottle that the ref either goes out with or takes at some point then hands back right before the misting. Or they carry the bottle on their person, in a waistband or boot. You build up some spit and practice it, a little color goes a long way.

And Nick asks about a contract (and the Big Show/Brock ring collapse, but I skipped that.

Hey,

2.) Whats the dealw ith Booker T? I read that he's int alks of going back to the WWE? Also, Billy Gunn recently got released from TNA as well. Any thoughts on him possibly coming back to WWE as well?

Thanks for taking the time to answer these for me.

Booker T is, according to the dirt sheets, heading back to WWE once his contract is up in November. He and TNA have fallen out, due to his behaviour and attitude. He walked out on a match in Zurich after Scott Steiner either did a bad thing to the Swiss flag and/or asked fans to chuck stuff into the ring. Refusing to job to Matt Morgon on Impact was the final straw.

A brief moment on my high horse here.

Look, people, I understand that in the past, the difference between jobbing to a guy on TV and jobbing to him on PPV was marked. But nowadays? PPV and TV sadly carry the same amount of weight. So pulling the "If I'm gonna lose to him, it should be on PPV" argument doesn't hold water, especially when you're in a company written by Russo. Find a new one.

And Kip James is still a member of the TNA roster, they just can't work out what to do with him at the moment. Give it time.

And in our final skip ahead, Michael gets a break thanks to an outsider answering part of the question.

Hey man, read every week.

I'll cut straight to the questions

1. Why do referees stop counting a pin in a tag team match because a partner kicks the pinner, even if the one making the pin remains on top, and the person being pinned's shoulders remain on the mat? This has always bothered me.

I agree that it's lazy. What's supposed to be happening is that the contact between the two is being broken. But whereas guys would pull them off or sell enough that they'd move, now you just have a stomp being enough to break a fall.

You could say that it's referee's discretion, in that the guy kicking is clearly in control and thus the ref gives him the benefit of the doubt in terms of breaking it up. And/or you have to be in control of a cover, not just on top. Once a guy is stomped, he's not in control.

Weak, yes, but I refuse to work hard to cover other people's laziness.

2. I know Japan isn't your thing, but in this weeks top 5, it was mentioned that Kenta Kobashi has only used the Burning Hammer 7 times. If it isn't too tedious, could you name the 7 occasions he's used it? Please include the opponent and date.

The Top 5 was favourite wrestling moves. And since he gave us that stat, I asked Chris Lansdell if he knew those 7 off the top of his head.

Yeah, I do. The four people to take it are Misawa, Taue, Akiyama and KENTA.

Misawa took the first on Oct 24 1998, it was the sickest in my opinion. Almost exactly a year later (October 23), Misawa took it again in their title match, which Kobashi won.

Jun Akiyama first took the move on December 23 2000. It would be over 2 years before we saw it again on January 3 2003 against Misawa in a GHC title match, and again on July 10 of 2004 against Akiyama.

He would debut the wrist clutch variant on September 10 of 2004 against Akira Taue. In my mind the wrist clutch looks far weaker but is a lot safer than the standard one. KENTA would also take the wrist clutch on March 10 2006, making him the last person to take the move from Kobashi.

Thanks to Chris for that.

3. Wasn't Kurt Angle's TNA contract supposed to expire in September? I was really hoping to see him go back to the WWE. Can you shed any light on his current contract status?

Yes, September 2009 was the date banded about in September 2008. And TNA is in the middle of negotiating with him, they offered him a new contract in the middle of his court case with Rhaka Khan. So the timing is right. But we've not heard anything of him re-signing or resigning, so it's still up in the air. So, no I can't shed any more light on his current contract status.

4. On that note, do you know when Samoa Joe's contract ends?

Thanks!
Keep up the great work!

It was said to be 2010/11, but then last year he and TNA had some negotiations over the ownership of Samoa Joe the name, and there was a new contract signed, apparently, which may or may not have been an extension. Not for a while, basically.

Next up we have Manu, of course.

From an interview with RVD:

He said the last thing Chris Benoit said to him in early June 2007 was that he has a lot of respect for leaving and that he has enough sense to walk away and some of us don't have that same sense. Van Dam brought up the 1993 incident and Benoit said he didn't know what he was talking about in 1993 and then weeks later was the Benoit murders.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any idea what happened in 1993?

Indeed I do! That's the end of a story from RVD's recent appearance on The LAW radio show. Here's the full quote.

Lovranski (one of the co-hosts of the show) remarks how so many wrestlers always have the mindset of coming back and Van Dam's head is in a completely different place. Van Dam says he has always walked away from promotions when he was ready to. He said in 1993 he was Robbie V in WCW and Ole Anderson had just taken over for Bill Watts and started to job him and he decided to leave. He said in 1993 Chris Benoit confronted him and asked what his problem was and how many people want his job and Van Dam said he was making $100 and Benoit was on contract. He said he also walked away from All Japan Pro Wrestling and walked away from ECW when they owed him too much money. He also brought up a story in 1997 when the WWE was working with ECW and Van Dam started working on ‘Raw' and walked out when they wanted him to lose to Road Dogg and has always known what was best for his career.

He said the last thing Chris Benoit said to him in early June 2007 was that he has a lot of respect for leaving and that he has enough sense to walk away and some of us don't have that same sense. Van Dam brought up the 1993 incident and Benoit said he didn't know what he was talking about in 1993 and then weeks later was the Benoit murders.

So there you go, the 93 incident was RVD leaving WCW.

Alex makes me shudder a little inside.

Were there big plans for Ludvig Borga? Outside of Yoko, there weren't too many big heels at the time. Was there any talk of putting the belt on him?

Well, it has been said by some people that Borga/Luger was a planned WMX main event at some point, although by ‘some people' I mean ‘Borga himself and people repeating what he said'. Obviously the WWF saw him as a big effective foreign heel, and they'd push him hard. But no, I don't think Borga was in line for a title run when he got injured, really. Never say never, of course, but it wasn't in the cards.

Josh asks just how hard wrestlers have it.

For years I've heard what a hard road schedule the WWE has. What is the typical schedule for a WWE wrestler? Not someone like John Cena who probably has alot of personal appearances, someone more mid card, like a John Morrison.

All right, let's take John Morrison, his next week, Monday 19th to Sunday 25th. Although to be fair, the WWE works on a Friday-Tuesday schedule, they rarely, if ever, have shows on Wed or Thursday. Now, assuming he's not going to appear on Raw this coming week, he has the Smackdown/ECW tapings at Columbia on Tuesday, then he has a couple days off, then on Saturday he has to be in State College, Pa for a live show, then in Pittsburgh the following night for the PPV.

If he's to be on Raw, that's another day he has to travel to and from, and if he's doing a WWE.com video, that might take up more time and another day to film. He doesn't have any official live appearances booked.

But the schedule is not nearly as bad as it once was, by all means. You used to work 300 days a year, night in, night out. Now you work for 3-4 days then get a couple off, with the occasional appearance at a store, or interview or such. And that's 50 or so weeks in a year. Travelling to new and unfamiliar places, having to work out travel and accommodation, and then eat right, train, work on your skills… It's not easy. But it's not as brutal as it once was.

After all, someone trying to wrestle the modern style on the older timetable would be dead real quick.

Next up, Goldberg V Hogan, with Steve.

I just finished watching the Rise and Fall of WCW DVD and thought it was really good but I have just one question. They treated the first nail in WCW's coffin was giving away Hogan vs Goldberg for free instead of a Pay Per View. They said it was because Bischoff was more concerned about ratings. Now my question is, was it Bischoff's call at the beginning to put it in the Georgia Dome or were there any plans to put it on the Bash at the Beach PPV or whatever PPV was next on the dockett?

Ah yes, the infamous Hogan/Goldberg match. Proof positive that Bischoff was an idiot/Hogan was a bastard/WCW sucked/Whatever you damm well want. Let's review the tape!



Bash at the Beach 98 was indeed the next PPV. And because of that…

Sigh…

This was the right move. Regardless of what his personal motivations were, Hogan pretty much said "Why doesn't Goldberg beat me for the title on Nitro?" Hogan, pretty much out of the blue, offered to put Goldberg over. You'd want to do that as quickly as possible to avoid him changing his mind.

Plus BATB was by then locked in with Hogan/Rodman V DDP/Malone. Given the publicity involved, it wouldn't have worked to pull Hogan out of the match and replace him with someone else. And asking Hogan to work twice was out of the question.

And besides, Goldberg's launch was seen by a hell of a lot more people than if it had happened on PPV. The Goldberg launch was supposed to usher in a new era, it was supposed to be a rebirth of WCW, hence you want the maximum number of people to see it happen, at a huge venue with a rabid crowd cheering Goldberg on. The fact that it drew a ratings win was way down the list.

Bischoff was handed the card and he played it. Had he been the one to suggest the match, or had it been planned, then yes, it would have been stupid. But the way it happened? It was arguably the best move possible, given the people involved.

Do not complain that all the DX skits on Raw are stupid, silly, or gay. Because Japan is 100 times worse. Warning, this one is not for the faint of heart.

What is this I don't even…

Brian is up next.

Why doesn't Vince try to raid the talent of TNA? The best thing about the Monday Night Wars in my opinion was seeing wrestlers jump ship and actually be given opportunities they weren't given in their previous company. Look at guys like Foley, Austin, and Jericho. These guys were midcarders in WCW but became HUGE stars in the WWE. Couldn't the same thing happen with guys like Joe, AJ, Daniels, etc.? Yet I've never seen any jump ship, other than Christian and Jeff, who were already ex-WWE stars, and Monty Brown and Chris Harris, who failed because of injuries and bad gimmick/worth ethic. Wouldn't that help freshen up Raw and provide a lot of great new storylines? Are the TNA guys locked in, or does Vince even make the effort to go after these guys?

Well, for the most part TNA guys are locked into contracts, so he can't go after them. He doesn't need to freshen up Raw or create new storylines, the current ones are working fine for him, apparently. Now, should certain guys show an interest when their contract is up, I'm sure Vince would welcome them with open arms and a new look, name, wardrobe, wrestling style and home town, but he's not wasting time chasing people he can't get.

Doinks Everywhere with mikeymc316!

I know Matt Borne was the original Doink The Clown and competed at WM 9, but who again was the guy that was Doink at WM 10? And was Matt Borne the one that was Doink in the Gimmick Battle Royal at WM17, was it the other guy or was it someone different?

The Doink at Wrestlemania X was the 4th Doink, Ray Licachelli.

Matt Borne originated the role, and played Doink from start to when Doink turned face.

Steve Keirn, a.k.a Skinner, was the Second Doink, although he never actually replaced Borne, he just played the other Doink when they switched, WM9, the famous Doink/Perfect matches and so on.

Then, after Borne left, Steve Lombardi a.k.a The Brooklyn Brawler took over.

And then, a couple weeks before the 94 Royal Rumble, Ray Licachelli took over as Doink, and he was Doink at WMX.

The Gimmick Battle Royal Doink was actually Matt Borne, back in the role he should be playing right now on ECW dammit. We need more Evil Clown in the WWE. Although apart from times when wrestlers dress up as Doink, Lombardi is now the default go-to Doink, when they need More Doink, Lombardi puts on the make up, and has been all the last few Doinks.

Except for the couple of times Nick Dinsmore played him in the APA Bar Room Brawl and then against Chris Benoit on behalf of Rhyno.

Clear?

From one clown to another, thanks to Nick

So I'm watching this WCW Main Event special from 1995 before the Bash at the Beach PPV (God I love WWE On Demand) and Eric Bischoff mentions, almost sarcastically, that he's looking forward to the debut of Bash Lambros. Is that in reference to WCW executive Nick Lambros? If not, (or even if it is) how or why is this funny or worth bringing up at all on national television???

Wow, you can find practically anything on the net.



Well, I couldn't find a payoff, so all I can say is that it's almost certainly an injoke between Bischoff and his right hand man. Perhaps Bash was a nickname he was given as a joke, and Eric thought it was funny.

Hell, I put in a few in-jokes in this thing practically every week, and no-one calls me out on that. But then I'm not running a multi-million dollar business, nor am I trying to sell you on buying a PPV, so there's a time and place for everything, even Not Forgetting Jillian Hall's minute as Diva's Champion.

See?

Now we have Ryan

Hey Matt, great work on this column. My question deals with the (co)main event at WM 8 between Sid and Hogan. The finish was botched because Papa Shango was late getting down to the ring. Now, at the time, most people knew this very well could be Hogan's last match (pretty laughable looking back), so I was wondering if Papa Shango was ever reprimanded for screwing up the finish for the potential last match of the company's main star? Not just that, but it screws up the ending of a WM Main event. That seems like a pretty big screw up to me. (and no I don't count being turned into Kama as punishment). Thanks and keep up the great work.



Well, he did spend most of 1992 on his back, losing in practically every match and in every feud, so it's not like he got a big push out of it.

But no, I couldn't find any word about him being punished about the mess up. It's entirely possible that whoever was meant to cue him fucked up. Certainly that's what happened at Starrcade 1997, Terry Taylor sent Bret Hart out too early. But anyone out there watched Papa's shoot interview?

Na-na-na-na na-na-na-na Birdman! Birdman! Birdman!

This summer, I was watching the "Macho Madness" DVD, which features a tag match between Randy Savage and Bret Hart vs. Shawn Michaels and Ric Flair. On commentary are Jim Ross and Bobby Heenan.

Now then... this particular match took place in the summer of 1992-- I actually remember seeing it live at the Worcester Centrum-- and J.R. didn't make his debut until spring 1993, at WrestleMania IX. In fact, Flair had already left the WWF by the time J.R. arrived on the scene. So, what's up?

On commentary, both Ross and Heenan sound younger (and, in Heenan's case, healthier); in other words, it wasn't a case of WWE re-dubbing the commentary 17 years after the fact.

My only thought is that they had at one point included this match on an old Coliseum Video release or something from 1993 (after Ross debuted and before the Brain departed). Any insights?

Well, I probably should post a video of a GOOD match in here somewhere…




Now, the match appeared on two Coliseum Home Videos, Grudges Gripes & Grunts as well as German Fan Favorites. GG&G did come out in 1993, so your instincts were correct, when they put the video out on Tape, they had Ross and Heenan dub it over in 1993, and then they used it again for the DVD.

Next up, yet another set of videos I can post, thanks to OldSchool4Life

Hi there, really enjoy the column. Got a question, who was the guy on Piper's Pit that said something about Piper never wrestling on television, which led to Piper squashing the guy on TV with multiple DDTs? And didn't the guy die shortly afterward? Any info on this will be greatly appreciated, thanks, have a good one.

You are asking about Piper's Pit with Rick McGraw. Here's the Pit in question.



The match is online, but due to it being flagged, I can't embed it. Here's the link

Now, in that match, Piper hit McGraw several times with devastating moves, including 2 DDTs. The match ended when the ref called for the bell, McGraw clearly unable to defend himself.

Not long afterwards, McGraw died suddenly, age 30, heart attack. Now, were the two related? Almost certainly not. The match itself is brutal in terms of Piper beating McGraw up, but it's hardly shockingly violent. Instead, McGraw died from either an unknown heart condition, or perhaps due to drugs (Bret Hart discusses this in his book, unsurprisingly), or both, or some other aspect. But Piper didn't beat him to death.

A more in-depth article on the subject was written by Mr. Old School, who is fast becoming my go to guy for deaths in-ring.

Yet another Mike asks about Thumbtacks. Good God Almighty, Thumbtacks!

Great column keep up the good work. Now here is my question.

What's the deal with thumbtacks? They're fake right? I mean for one in the Cactus Jack Randy Orton match when Orton is thrown back first into them, moments later you see tacks even in his chest. So if they're real how do thumbtacks just fly off the mat into the air with enough force mind you to pierce his chest? His chest never lands anywhere the tacks.



Well, we're at an impasse here. Thumbtacks are real, given that they are so small that while it hurts like a mother, the wounds are all small and easily healed, so they don't bother to fix them, although they may file them down a little if they so choose. Especially since wrestlers tend to only take them in the back, which is nice and fleshy and has enough skin to not worry about any permanent damage, like taking tacks head on would. And you could clearly see the wounds on Orton's back later in the match.

That said, I have no real idea how the tacks end up on Orton's chest. That does seem to defy physics slightly, and I wasn't able to find a full match online to check if it happened earlier. I supposed those tacks might have had some fake ones mixed in, but the majority were legit.

And lastly, Gozzz asks about Jim Neidhart.

Hi again Mathew!

In last week's column, you mentioned that Jim Neidhart joined and was kicked out of DX within 15 minutes on Raw in late 1997. What was the storyline there? I don't remember that at all. Thanks!

Well, it was the third Raw after Montreal, November 24th, 1997. Bret Hart was gone, and the other Hart Foundation members were in various stages of trying to get out of their contracts. Shawn Michaels, on the other hand, was getting into the swing of being the obnoxious duckweed we all love and miss. And, on this night, he said he'd bring Bret Hart out, top of the second hour. He brought out a midget instead. After some insults and comedy, Neidhart then came out to the ramp and insulted DX and threatened them. DX then said that they always respected Jim, and that with Bret gone, it was his time to shine. Or words to that effect, I couldn't find a video or a script so I'm going on memory here.

Basically, they offered him a spot in DX. Jim thought it over for the rest of the show, then joined in time to help Shawn defeat Vader in the main event to keep Shawn's World Title. Then DX beat them both up, just because they could. This bit I found.



He was on his way out, although he'd be around a little while longer…

My Damm Opinion

Eric asks about TNA becoming WCW.

Hello ask411,

Just got done watching "The Rise and Fall of WCW", and I have to say it is a collosal disappointment in terms of the documentary itself. I guess I should have known that the WWE would write it completely from their point of view and forget about any of the successes that WCW had, by only using guys under contract with them or stars that are in Vince's favor. I guess a few were mentioned, but they only mentioned Sting twice, didnt mention the horsemen at all, didnt mention anything about the Warrior or Bret Hart coming in, and spent a good deal of time burying people that they dont like. My question is, could TNA become another WCW? Is Vince Russo the reason Hulk Hogan and others wont wrestle for TNA? What could turn TNA into a company capable of taking on the WWE, I know many on here, say it would be pushing younger stars, is that the answer? Are there any stars out there that could come to their roster and make an impact on the ratings immediately. Is a Goldberg/Warrior match too expensive to book, despite the fact it would be horrible? I guess the main reason I am asking this, I think WCW is still very popular as many of the questions you answer are WCW questions?

Well, there's quite a few questions there, but all around the same general theme, hence why it's in this section.

I don't think WCW/TNA is a good comparison to make. WCW, from the Turner buyout onwards, was either horribly run or extremely profitable. TNA is neither, it's oddly run and just turning a profit. It's just not in the same position as WCW, it's not a fair comparison.

Russo is part of the reason for Hogan not wanting to sign on, sure. I've covered that before, I believe, Hogan doesn't trust Russo as far as the man can shoot.

If I knew what TNA could do to become capable of taking on WWE, I'd be working on using that magic formula on my home fed. Suffice to say that this comes up in the Roundtable, and the answer I gave was to turn the focus of the company onto the PPV, make the PPV the center point, and that should halo effect everything else.

And if Sting, Angle or Tara couldn't impact the ratings,



There's no-one out there who would.

Well, maybe The Rock, but that's never going to happen.

WCW is popular still, there's no question. When it was on, it produced great TV, superb matches, and a lot of fond memories. It also produced terrible, dragging storylines, terrible business moves and enough punchlines to sink a ship. It's a tale of two companies, really.

TNA is not as bad off as WCW at it's worse, nor, sadly, not as good as WCW at it's best. And it's not going anywhere just yet.

But what do you guys think?